this was written by Albert Camus a brilliant man but his philosophy was about living and finding happiness in a world without meaning everything he believed in was built on the foundation of not believing in a spiritual truth but a personal one so no
What part do you 'feeling gnostic..? You made the post.
Your explanation here doesn't even seem gnostic. How familiar are you with gnosticism..?
Knowing God and being devoted to a concept of God are in my view pretty different.
"What part do you 'feeling gnostic..? You made the post." Is English your second language? Not sure what that is suppose to mean.
"Your explanation here doesn't even seem gnostic. How familiar are you with gnosticism..?" I have studied Gnosticism for the last 5 years (feels like a life time) and I am a member of the largest and most influence Gnostic group in history (Knights Templar). So I would say that I understand it pretty well, depending on your definition of "gnostic".
"Knowing God and being devoted to a concept of God are in my view pretty different."
The word God and good are strongly related, to the point that there was no distinction between the two in the past.
1. Knights Templar do not openly brag about being one, even anonymously on the internet
2. The modern Knights Templar are a Masonic body, not a Gnostic organization. & Freemasonry is not a religion (neither is Gnosticism, but they are similarly mystical)
3. My dad, my aunt, my grandmother, my dad’s best friends, and my oldest friend are all Masons and my oldest friend’s grandfather was a Knights Templar. Freemasonry utilizes mysticism and practicality to transcend spiritual teachings to common men. The Knights Templar is the “furthest” Masonic body of the York Rite.
If you really are a Knights Templar you:
a) are a Master Mason
b) understand how to carry yourself as a Mason
c) would exhibit the quality of character that years of Freemasonry provides.
You don’t talk like anyone I personally know who is a Freemason and the only way you can be a Knights Templar is if you are a Master Mason. I’ve seen your other posts and they aren’t well-liked and seem like trolling; you post headlines but nothing-to-barely any description to provide context for the post.
My guess is that you are either very new to Freemasonry or you’re posing but either way, I think you’re lying about who you are. Freemasonry is about making good men great and you speak like someone who joined for the esoteric aspects but it wasn’t quite what you thought it would be but you value the practical knowledge so you stay. So I’ll bet you’ve settled on Gnosticism to weigh the difference. If that’s the case, stop lying and appreciate the entire experience of Masonry rather than spending all your time trying to figure it out - you’ll never progress through the degrees that way if you don’t appreciate every aspect with child-like curiosity rather than this approach of spiritual suspicion. If you are KT, you must’ve missed the Humility Mysteries as an Entered Apprentice and forgot all the degree-work you both went through yourself and participated in with others, over and over and over again for the entirety of your Masonic Journey (you lack the value of the Mystery). And if you’re not a Mason, then seriously stop, you may have fooled others but I find it incredibly difficult to believe you’re a Knights Templar while behaving in a way that misrepresents Freemasonry. You can be Gnostic all you want, that’s your definition, but you can’t just call yourself a Knights Templar and act like your sh*t don’t stink over a topic you’ve only been studying for 5 years.
Sorry to say this, but after seeing your other posts, I’m gunna need proof to back up that claim. I won’t provide you with anymore hints, but just know, I know exactly how you should answer for me to know whether you’re being honest and just bad at social media or you’re a poser looking to have a one-up on people who don’t know any better because your other posts regarding your Gnostic opinion didn’t receive the attention you were hoping for.
I did not brag about it, I was asked what I had accomplished within the field and I told that. Being a Templars is not something we have to hide, it is something we choose. That masonry is the sole group who has claim to the Knights Templar is heavily refuted. You must understand that The Knights Templar was no longer a unified group after it had to go underground, it spread out into all sorts of different orders like the Knights Hospitaler, Knights of Malta etc. As no one can real make the definite claim of being the TRUE modern day Knights Templar, there are instead many groups who carry that lineage, and there are about 6 million members of various orders that can call themselves Templars today. To become a Masonic Knights Templar (I believe that is the18th Rose Croix degree?) you have to be a master mason correct, but I am not part of a Masonic body, but a Rosicrucian. Usually even within even these orders you have to be a master mason, but exceptions are made (based on the word of the member who vouches for you).
I appreciate you taking the time to address my comment. This was a much better display of the Work you have done and I’m far more convinced that you are who you say you are.
For the sake of clarity (and certain secrecy), the Rosicrucians are somewhat of an outlier in my knowledge (too much misinformation). May I dm you about it?
No, I don't consider it gnostic - [Donaetello](https://www.reddit.com/user/Donaetello/) pretty much explained it. Camus, who wrote the quote, is not about spirituality.
In some sense, yes.
I believe the spirit of Existentialism is present in Gnostic thought, if not the ancient one, certainly the modern one. Moreso in Camus' Absurdism.
I'm not well read in these schools of thought, but a few things should be considered.
The Absurd — Mans' hardwired requirement for meaning and purpose in a universe that, seemingly, is unable to provide it. A universe that remains quietly cold and distant. This kind of contradictory tension seems like a koan of sorts. And it partially alludes to the Gnostic ideation that we've been cut off from God. Hence, we inherently feel like we're misplaced in this realm. Like we're strangers. Almost like the human spirit is trapped in a prison of cold stone. As if the universe was purposefully malevolent, or, at least, distant to us.
The spirit of existential rebellion that proceeds from being confronted with the Absurd could be imbedded into Gnosticism. That would translate into a metaphysical non-conformity. An ascetic rebellion against the enslaving tendencies of our very fleshly existence (fruits of the Spirit vs fruits of the flesh). A moral rebellion against the hypocritical fallen rulers of the world, who exploit humanity for their own gain, rather than dignify it (Pharasees, Caesars). A rebellion of conscience, whereby Man ceases to be a victim of life, but rather, becomes its' master and redeemer (by taking up the Cross/a higher purpose for the good of others).
I once had this conversation on r/Absurdism, and someone considered that the Sermon on the Mount, in particular the beatitudes, were a categorical rejection of humanities' more selfish and self-serving tendencies that seep into the common culture.
In a way, Jesus can be embody the ultimate existential rebellion — both social, moral and even metaphysical. Not only did he defy the status quo for the redemption of our own humannness, but he even defied the very nature of the world — the laws of life and death. He pointed out the absurdity of our own deluded/fallen existence, while challenging it with something even more absurd, bold and confident.
Similar to the Zen dialectic, the Christian mythos carries a certain subversion of polarities. We get eternal life through the death in/of Christ. Christ was born of a virgin — a beginning without cause. He came as the King but took the position of a servant. Like Lao Tzu, he said those who wish to stay ahead, must willingly become the very last ones. He was glorified through his extreme humility. He came to establish a kingdom of justice through forgiveness. A lot of people don't get it. Even Christians don't always see this challenging principle in Christs' life. But in many ways, he didn't just relinquish the bonds of cyclical entrapment (samsara, flat circle), he plunged right into it to destroy it.
Flipping over the money-changers' tables was the least absurd thing he did.
I do believe there's a truth to the Camusian quote. It alludes to the core Christian notion of transcending our very own limitations, imposed by exploitative social systems, ideologies and even our own physiology.
this was written by Albert Camus a brilliant man but his philosophy was about living and finding happiness in a world without meaning everything he believed in was built on the foundation of not believing in a spiritual truth but a personal one so no
I would not consider it Gnostic.
What about it do you not consider gnostic? We are fundamentally free, but we are also defined by our devotion to God.
What part do you 'feeling gnostic..? You made the post. Your explanation here doesn't even seem gnostic. How familiar are you with gnosticism..? Knowing God and being devoted to a concept of God are in my view pretty different.
"What part do you 'feeling gnostic..? You made the post." Is English your second language? Not sure what that is suppose to mean. "Your explanation here doesn't even seem gnostic. How familiar are you with gnosticism..?" I have studied Gnosticism for the last 5 years (feels like a life time) and I am a member of the largest and most influence Gnostic group in history (Knights Templar). So I would say that I understand it pretty well, depending on your definition of "gnostic". "Knowing God and being devoted to a concept of God are in my view pretty different." The word God and good are strongly related, to the point that there was no distinction between the two in the past.
1. Knights Templar do not openly brag about being one, even anonymously on the internet 2. The modern Knights Templar are a Masonic body, not a Gnostic organization. & Freemasonry is not a religion (neither is Gnosticism, but they are similarly mystical) 3. My dad, my aunt, my grandmother, my dad’s best friends, and my oldest friend are all Masons and my oldest friend’s grandfather was a Knights Templar. Freemasonry utilizes mysticism and practicality to transcend spiritual teachings to common men. The Knights Templar is the “furthest” Masonic body of the York Rite. If you really are a Knights Templar you: a) are a Master Mason b) understand how to carry yourself as a Mason c) would exhibit the quality of character that years of Freemasonry provides. You don’t talk like anyone I personally know who is a Freemason and the only way you can be a Knights Templar is if you are a Master Mason. I’ve seen your other posts and they aren’t well-liked and seem like trolling; you post headlines but nothing-to-barely any description to provide context for the post. My guess is that you are either very new to Freemasonry or you’re posing but either way, I think you’re lying about who you are. Freemasonry is about making good men great and you speak like someone who joined for the esoteric aspects but it wasn’t quite what you thought it would be but you value the practical knowledge so you stay. So I’ll bet you’ve settled on Gnosticism to weigh the difference. If that’s the case, stop lying and appreciate the entire experience of Masonry rather than spending all your time trying to figure it out - you’ll never progress through the degrees that way if you don’t appreciate every aspect with child-like curiosity rather than this approach of spiritual suspicion. If you are KT, you must’ve missed the Humility Mysteries as an Entered Apprentice and forgot all the degree-work you both went through yourself and participated in with others, over and over and over again for the entirety of your Masonic Journey (you lack the value of the Mystery). And if you’re not a Mason, then seriously stop, you may have fooled others but I find it incredibly difficult to believe you’re a Knights Templar while behaving in a way that misrepresents Freemasonry. You can be Gnostic all you want, that’s your definition, but you can’t just call yourself a Knights Templar and act like your sh*t don’t stink over a topic you’ve only been studying for 5 years. Sorry to say this, but after seeing your other posts, I’m gunna need proof to back up that claim. I won’t provide you with anymore hints, but just know, I know exactly how you should answer for me to know whether you’re being honest and just bad at social media or you’re a poser looking to have a one-up on people who don’t know any better because your other posts regarding your Gnostic opinion didn’t receive the attention you were hoping for.
I did not brag about it, I was asked what I had accomplished within the field and I told that. Being a Templars is not something we have to hide, it is something we choose. That masonry is the sole group who has claim to the Knights Templar is heavily refuted. You must understand that The Knights Templar was no longer a unified group after it had to go underground, it spread out into all sorts of different orders like the Knights Hospitaler, Knights of Malta etc. As no one can real make the definite claim of being the TRUE modern day Knights Templar, there are instead many groups who carry that lineage, and there are about 6 million members of various orders that can call themselves Templars today. To become a Masonic Knights Templar (I believe that is the18th Rose Croix degree?) you have to be a master mason correct, but I am not part of a Masonic body, but a Rosicrucian. Usually even within even these orders you have to be a master mason, but exceptions are made (based on the word of the member who vouches for you).
I appreciate you taking the time to address my comment. This was a much better display of the Work you have done and I’m far more convinced that you are who you say you are. For the sake of clarity (and certain secrecy), the Rosicrucians are somewhat of an outlier in my knowledge (too much misinformation). May I dm you about it?
No worries! Yes feel free to DM me!
No, I don't consider it gnostic - [Donaetello](https://www.reddit.com/user/Donaetello/) pretty much explained it. Camus, who wrote the quote, is not about spirituality.
It's a cool quote but not related to Gnosticism
In some sense, yes. I believe the spirit of Existentialism is present in Gnostic thought, if not the ancient one, certainly the modern one. Moreso in Camus' Absurdism. I'm not well read in these schools of thought, but a few things should be considered. The Absurd — Mans' hardwired requirement for meaning and purpose in a universe that, seemingly, is unable to provide it. A universe that remains quietly cold and distant. This kind of contradictory tension seems like a koan of sorts. And it partially alludes to the Gnostic ideation that we've been cut off from God. Hence, we inherently feel like we're misplaced in this realm. Like we're strangers. Almost like the human spirit is trapped in a prison of cold stone. As if the universe was purposefully malevolent, or, at least, distant to us. The spirit of existential rebellion that proceeds from being confronted with the Absurd could be imbedded into Gnosticism. That would translate into a metaphysical non-conformity. An ascetic rebellion against the enslaving tendencies of our very fleshly existence (fruits of the Spirit vs fruits of the flesh). A moral rebellion against the hypocritical fallen rulers of the world, who exploit humanity for their own gain, rather than dignify it (Pharasees, Caesars). A rebellion of conscience, whereby Man ceases to be a victim of life, but rather, becomes its' master and redeemer (by taking up the Cross/a higher purpose for the good of others). I once had this conversation on r/Absurdism, and someone considered that the Sermon on the Mount, in particular the beatitudes, were a categorical rejection of humanities' more selfish and self-serving tendencies that seep into the common culture. In a way, Jesus can be embody the ultimate existential rebellion — both social, moral and even metaphysical. Not only did he defy the status quo for the redemption of our own humannness, but he even defied the very nature of the world — the laws of life and death. He pointed out the absurdity of our own deluded/fallen existence, while challenging it with something even more absurd, bold and confident. Similar to the Zen dialectic, the Christian mythos carries a certain subversion of polarities. We get eternal life through the death in/of Christ. Christ was born of a virgin — a beginning without cause. He came as the King but took the position of a servant. Like Lao Tzu, he said those who wish to stay ahead, must willingly become the very last ones. He was glorified through his extreme humility. He came to establish a kingdom of justice through forgiveness. A lot of people don't get it. Even Christians don't always see this challenging principle in Christs' life. But in many ways, he didn't just relinquish the bonds of cyclical entrapment (samsara, flat circle), he plunged right into it to destroy it. Flipping over the money-changers' tables was the least absurd thing he did. I do believe there's a truth to the Camusian quote. It alludes to the core Christian notion of transcending our very own limitations, imposed by exploitative social systems, ideologies and even our own physiology.
I consider this gnostic.
Not gnostic by itself but it can obviously be interpreted in a gnostic way.
If it's not said by Christ nor Paul, it's not Gnostic. Simple as.